RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 739959 - [RFE] Allow separate fractional attrs to be defined for incremental and total protocols
Summary: [RFE] Allow separate fractional attrs to be defined for incremental and total...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: 389-ds-base
Version: 6.2
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
urgent
urgent
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Rich Megginson
QA Contact: IDM QE LIST
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 739172
Blocks: 747120
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-09-20 14:41 UTC by Nathan Kinder
Modified: 2020-09-13 20:04 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 389-ds-base-1.2.9.12-2.el6
Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 739172
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-12-06 17:56:33 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github 389ds 389-ds-base issues 250 0 None None None 2020-09-13 20:04:23 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHEA-2011:1711 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE 389-ds-base bug fix and enhancement update 2011-12-06 01:02:20 UTC

Description Nathan Kinder 2011-09-20 14:41:22 UTC 
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #739172 +++

When using fractional replication, there is a single list of attributes to exclude that is used for both total update and incremental updated replication protocols.  While this is generally what one wants to do, it would be nice to have the ability to have separate attribute lists for each protocol.

In the case where you are using a plug-in like memberOf, you want to exclude the memberOf attribute from replication to allow each replica to generate it's own memberOf attributes.  This makes sense for the incremental update protocol, but there is no reason to exclude it from total update, as the memberOf consistency is in a known good state.  If we could replicate memberOf for total update, there would be no need to run a potentially costly memberOf fixup task on each replica after it is initialized.

--- Additional comment from nkinder on 2011-09-16 13:08:17 EDT ---

Created attachment 523589 [details]
Patch

--- Additional comment from nkinder on 2011-09-16 13:28:29 EDT ---

*** Bug 739176 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

--- Additional comment from rmeggins on 2011-09-16 13:36:39 EDT ---

If you specify a list of fractional attributes for incremental protocol, and you do not specify a list for total protocol, will total protocol use the list of the incremental attributes?

--- Additional comment from nkinder on 2011-09-16 13:42:55 EDT ---

(In reply to comment #3)
> If you specify a list of fractional attributes for incremental protocol, and
> you do not specify a list for total protocol, will total protocol use the list
> of the incremental attributes?

Yes.  I did this to remain backwards compatible.  I don't want someone upgrading to suddenly find that attributes they want completely excluded (like passwords) are being pushed to replicas during initialization.

--- Additional comment from nkinder on 2011-09-16 16:46:42 EDT ---

Pushed to master.  Thanks to Rich and Noriko for their reviews!

Counting objects: 25, done.
Delta compression using up to 2 threads.
Compressing objects: 100% (13/13), done.
Writing objects: 100% (13/13), 2.19 KiB, done.
Total 13 (delta 11), reused 0 (delta 0)
To ssh://git.fedorahosted.org/git/389/ds.git
   6120b3d..0157534  master -> master
Comment 1 Nathan Kinder 2011-09-20 14:42:54 UTC 
This is needed for use by IPA.
Comment 3 Sankar Ramalingam 2011-11-08 10:30:33 UTC 
Added two tests in TET under mmrepl/fractional to verify the newly added fractional replication attribute list. 

This is how the configuration looks like...
/usr/lib64/mozldap/ldapsearch -p 30000 -h localhost -D "cn=Directory Manager" -w Secret123 -b "cn=fractional_0_to_fractional_2,cn=replica,cn=\"dc=example,dc=com\",cn=mapping tree,cn=config" objectClass=* nsDS5ReplicatedAttributeList nsDS5ReplicatedAttributeListTotal
version: 1
dn: cn=fractional_0_to_fractional_2,cn=replica,cn=dc\3Dexample\2Cdc\3Dcom,cn=m
 apping tree,cn=config
nsDS5ReplicatedAttributeList: (objectclass=*) $ EXCLUDE audio businessCategory
  carLicense departmentNumber description destinationIndicator displayName em
 ployeeNumber employeeType userPassword facsimileTelephoneNumber roomNumber t
 elephoneNumber memberOf manager
nsDS5ReplicatedAttributeListTotal: (objectclass=*) $ EXCLUDE audio businessCat
 egory carLicense departmentNumber description destinationIndicator displayNa
 me employeeNumber employeeType userPassword facsimileTelephoneNumber roomNum
 ber telephoneNumber

As per the configuration, the memberOf and manager attributes synced when total update is run and not with incremental updates.

Hence marking the bug as verified.
Comment 4 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 17:56:33 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-1711.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.